PhilArchive
open access
Incommensurability and the Bonfire of the Meta-Theories: Response to Mizrahi
Scientists working within a paradigm must play by the rules of the game of that paradigm in solving problems, and that is why incommensurability arises when the rules of the game change. If we deny the thesis of the priority of paradigms, then there is no good argument for the incommensurability of theories and thus for taxonomic incommensurability, because there is no invariant way to determine the set of results provable, puzzles solvable, and propositions cogently formulable under a given paradigm.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Incommensurability#765119
- Métaphysique analytique, métaphysique naturalisée et ontologie appliquée#696645
- Incommensurability as Cognitive Deficiency: Three Mechanisms and Two Complexity Barriers#722940
- Resolution Theory: A Unified Theory of Thresholds#715806
- The Non-Mappability of Aristotelian Metaphysics under Conditions of Ontological Comparability#167318
Record · ID 759241
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive